Theresa May, the leader whom Johnson treated abominably, stood in the House of Commons, day after day, pleading for support .. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/21/may-offers-mps-vote-on-second-referendum-in-new-brexit-deal .. in honouring the vote on the 2016 Brexit referendum. She tried to ease the United Kingdom out of the European Union with a compromise deal respecting the diverse views of a divided nation. She was inept and she failed.
It was Johnson and his allies – in unofficial cahoots with Jeremy Corbyn – who stopped her. That Britain is still a member of the EU is their fault. The least they owe the country is the dignity of an orderly Brexit, not this shambles. Instead, like a school bully suddenly cowering in a corner, Johnson lacks the guts to do what May did and account for himself to parliament, despite knowing he lacks its support. To crown it all, he has the cheek to accuse those opposing a no-deal Brexit .. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/eu-referendum .. of being “undemocratic”.
‘When we saw Michael Gove barefacedly deny that proroguing parliament had ‘anything to do with Brexit’, we could almost see Dominic Cummings’ strings on his back.’ Photograph: Will Oliver/EPA
Johnson’s prorogation is a blatant admission of democratic opposition to no deal. If that opposition weakens his negotiating hand, tough. He should have won the support of the Commons in advance. He is out on a limb. He may have a majority of his own Tory MPs behind him, but he knows this is not a majority of parliament or a majority of voters. A majority of a majority can still be a minority. Johnson’s supposed mandate for no deal is an electoral Ponzi scheme.
Opponents of no deal now have precious few moves they can make. I remain sceptical of parliament’s capacity, even at this last ditch, to stop Johnson’s antics. Its past handling of Brexit has been so casual, so half-hearted and so mired in tribalism as to render it an inadequate custodian of the national interest. Today’s MPs serve merely as an electoral college of government, and a poor one at that. As a collective, as a coherent political force, MPs just do not exist.
The truth is that only one person (or two people) can avert a no-deal Brexit, and that is the Johnson-Cummings duumvirate who have backed it as a serious option for Britain’s future trade with the outside world. Britain is, as the Tory politician Quintin Hogg once remarked, an “elective dictatorship .. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_dictatorship ”. It has traditionally relied on dictators honouring precedent, dignity and proportionality. Most have. Johnson has not, but he clearly does not care. There is a Gatsby quality to him, of rich people having a good time .. https://www.shmoop.com/great-gatsby/wealth-quotes-4.html .. as they “smashed up things and creatures … and let other people clean up the mess they had made”. That is the fate of all nations that put their faith in unwritten constitutions. They are vulnerable to rogues.
[Insert: Looking at America today it can also be the fate of nations with a written constitution.]
The irony of the latest turn of events is that, at the end of last week, faint shafts of light were emerging through the media miasma that passes for accountability under the Johnson-Cummings regime. Downing Street let it be known that May’s withdrawal agreement might after all be acceptable, if only the open-ended Irish backstop could be removed. Brussels in return let it be known that Johnson’s new Whitehall sherpa, David Frost, was in town .. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-irish-backstop-eu-negotiations-barnier-merkel-macron-a9080636.html , and that the backstop was the issue under discussion.
Limiting the open-ended nature of the backstop Johnson says is undemocratic .. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49402840 .. would release him from his red line. It could be replaced by a time-limited one that crucially would be subject to parliamentary veto, and thus rendered democratic. This would enable the UK to withdraw in October on the basis of May’s deal. It would of course mean kicking the single-market issue down the road, but Brussels could not dictate the road’s length as before. As for another crisis two years ahead, we would at least be out of the EU, and tempers might have cooled. There might even be a new government.
Mooted alternatives – or add-ons – to a shift on the backstop include short-term sectoral deals, notably on agri-foods and medicines: a so-called standstill agreement .. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/standstill-agreement-would-offer-brexit-way-forward .. to ensure that nothing changes on 31 October. This would enable the Irish border to be left open at least for now, rendering the backstop unnecessary. Though it would curb the scope for third-country deals involving these products, if Dublin’s Leo Varadkar were happy, so might be Brussels. Again Johnson could claim to have achieved Brexit with a deal. Parliament would surely agree.
I still think the old withdrawal agreement is not dead. I still regard it as an honourable referendum compromise. The Irish backstop could be diluted. The UK could leave the EU. The single market, however battered, could survive to fight another day. Johnson could claim a sort of victory and go into an election with a nation traumatised but sane. But then I am a member of the optimism party. Is Johnson?
I'm guessing, now that Johnson has gained what was most important to him, the PM position, he will make concessions that he would have insisted May not bake before.
If interested in earlier lies of Johnson, Farage, and others, regarding sovereign control, or not, of nations within the EU, you really should watch this one, with Stephen Fry, at least once. Repeat
Create a 'take back control' illusion, and what have you got? Who gains from Brexit?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
